ACCOUNTS OF CHEXICAL- RESEARCH" Regietered ita CIS. Patent and Trademark Office; Copyright 1983 by the American Chemical Society
VOLUME 16 EDITOR JOSEPH F. BUNNETT ASSOCIATE EDITORS Joel E. Keizer John E. McMurry EDITORIAL ADVISORY BOARD Robert Abeles Richard Bernstein R. Stephen Berry Michel Boudart Maurice M. Bursey Edward A. Collins John T. Gerig Jenny P. Glusker Kendall N. Houk Jay K. Kochi Maurice M. Kreevoy Theodore Kuwana Ronald N. McElhaney Kurt Mislow George W. Parshall Kenneth N. Raymond Anthony M. Trozzolo Gene G. Wubbels Published by the AMERICAN CHEMICAL SOCIETY 1155 16thStreet, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20036
BOOKS AND JOURNALS
DIVISION D. H. Michael Bowen, Director Journals Department: Charles R. Bertach, Head; Marianne C. Brogan, Associate Head; Mary E. Scanlan, Assistant Manager Marketing and Sales Department: Claud K. Robinson, Head Production Department: Elmer M. Pusey, Jr., Head Research and Development Department: Seldon W. Terrant, Head The American Chemical Society and its editors assume no responsibility for the statements and opinions advanced by contributors. Views expressed in the editorials are those of the writers and do not necessarily represent the official position of the American Chemical Society.
NUMBER3
M A R C H, 1 9 8 3
Ethics in Publication Both the integrity of science and the processes of scientific research require that scientists conduct themselves according to high ethical standards. By the "processes of scientific research" we mean not only the actual conduct of research but all the working interactions that scientists have between themselves and with suppliers, technicians, employers, and the general public in connection with conducting it. Some of the most important interactions between scientists occur via the printed word in journals. It is generally recognized that certain practices are ethically appropriate in the publication of research, while others are not, and there is a considerable consensus as to which are appropriate. However the consensus is not complete; innocent lapses occasionally occur. In other cases, probably rare, a scientist cuts an ethical corner with full knowledge that his behavior would if known not meet with general approval. Young scientists generally learn of these ethical standards from their mentors: from remarks made in research group meetings, or while preparing a manuscript for publication, or during discussion of some transgression that has come to light. Effective though such informal teaching often is, it can leave gaps. A young scientist or one who got into research more or less independently can be unaware of some important ethical principles. With this situation in mind, the editors of journals published by the American Chemical Society set up, in January 1982, a special subcommittee to consider the development of ethical guidelines relevant to scientific publication. The subcommittee is to report to the next ACS editors' conference, in mid-1983. No doubt its proposed guidelines, if accepted tentatively by the editors, will be published in order that criticism and suggestions may be obtained. The two principal concerns of the guidelines will surely be honesty and fairness. Honesty in scientific reports might seem to be so obviously essential as to require no comment; there are however facets of what is basically the honesty question that do require some attention. Fairness includes fairness to co-workers, fairness to other scientists from whom one may have obtained information via informal channels, abjuring from making unfair use of privileged information learned during review of manuscripts or grant proposals, and restraint in the use of scarce resources (such as journal space) that are provided by the institutions of our society. Much of the subcommittee's work will be straightforward, merely a matter of recording the prevailing consensus. But some of the questions that may have to be faced pose real dilemmas. Thus, is it ethical for a journal to publish research that waa conducted contrary to law or to prevailing ethical guidelines? Laws differ from one country to another, or from time to time within a given country, and ethical guidelines enunciated by a government department or a professional association also may change. Which should count-the laws or ethical code prevailing when and where the research was performed, or when and where the journal that may publish it is located? Or should some other standard prevail? Whether the initial set of guidelines should deal with such tough questions is unclear. It might be best, as a first step, to deal with matters on which there is consensus and to take up the more difficult matters later. Joseph F. Bunnett
